[arch-general] Pacman behaviour comparing numerical versions for package upgrades

[martin kalcher]

Am 29.06.2012 07:58, schrieb Allan McRae:
> On 29/06/12 15:50, Myra Nelson wrote:
>> I have a question about pacman's behaviour regarding packges to be updated.
>>
>> According to < $: man pacman >
>>
>> You can also use pacman -Su to upgrade all packages that are out of
>> date. See Sync Options below. When upgrading, pacman performs version
>> comparison to determine which packages need upgrading.
>>
>>      Alphanumeric: 1.0a < 1.0b < 1.0beta < 1.0p < 1.0pre < 1.0rc < 1.0
>> < 1.0.a < 1.0.1
>>      Numeric: 1 < 1.0 < 1.1 < 1.1.1 < 1.2 < 2.0 < 3.0.0
>>
>> That's very clear and makes sense. Here's where I'm confused. I build
>> some of my perl pacakges with cpanpkgbuild -f XXX::XXX::YYY. The
>> package from the official repos is:
>>      perl-datetime-format-strptime-1.5000-1-any.pkg.tar.xz
>>
>> the package I built is:
>>      perl-datetime-format-strptime-1.51-1-any.pkg.tar.xz
>>
>> I'm used to the warning package ??? local is newer than extra ???. But
>> with the above referenced package I had to list it in the [ IgnorePkg
>> ] line to keep pacman from trying to upgrade the package and still get
>> this warning.
>>
>>      "Ignoring upgrade from perl-datetime-format-strptime from 1.51-1
>> to 1.5000-1"
>>
>> No complaints as it's easy to fix, I was just wondering about the
>> reasoning. I'll jump out on a limb here and assume it's because the
>> repo package has 4 digits then the package version after the decimal
>> point and my package has two digits then the package version after the
>> decimal point. The developer changed his numbering scheme after 1.5000
>> to 1.51.
>>
>> Is this the correct behaviour for pacman?
>>
>
>
> 5000 > 51

So we dont need this:

 >> I'm used to the warning package ??? local is newer than extra ???.